Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Obviously you have ZERO experience with the Canadian culinary world...though brown gravy over fries is preferred by 9 out of 10 Canadians, one does NOT have brown gravy with fresh fish.
I sincerely believe Jesus would have used malt vinegar had he invented it then..perhaps it was that point in time when vinegar became acceptable?
In Canada the vast majority use white vinegar on fries, not malt.
Jesus described it perfectly. He was challenged on the topic of divorce and explained why God hates divorce:
3 And Pharisees came up to him and tested him by asking, “Is it lawful to divorce one's wife for any cause?†4 He answered, “Have you not read that he who created them from the beginning made them male and female, 5 and said, ‘Therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh’? 6 So they are no longer two but one flesh. What therefore God has joined together, let not man separate.â€
Matthew 19:3-7
Absolutely nothing in that passage about same sex relations. God designed sexual intimacy as a way for a male and female to become one flesh, both on an emotional and physical level. So yeah, genitalia is part of that equation to become one flesh. He decided the two sexes to be different so each can compliment and complete each other.
Quote:
Originally Posted by zthatzmanz28
The question was about a MAN and a WOMAN..why the flip would Christ go off topic? Christ responded appropriately give the context of the question...otherwise Jesus might as well have said the animals on the Ark were bound together for life--what senses would that have made?
Absolutely. However, since Jesus never alluded to homosexuality at all, the Matthew text, which, of course, has nothing to do with homosexuality, is the red herring that the Jeff's of Christianity always pull out of the Bible as if to make their case. That said, I have never seen Matthew 19:3-7 used to condemn 'in church' divorce and remarriage. Strange, isn't it?
Absolutely. However, since Jesus never alluded to homosexuality at all, the Matthew text, which, of course, has nothing to do with homosexuality, is the red herring that the Jeff's of Christianity always pull out of the Bible as if to make their case. That said, I have never seen Matthew 19:3-7 used to condemn 'in church' divorce and remarriage. Strange, isn't it?
You just have been in the wrong church.
Jesus in context was talking about Marriage period. Thus only a man and a woman.
Note Jesus also said:
KJV Matthew 19:9 And I say unto you, Whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery: and whoso marrieth her which is put away doth commit adultery.
He did not say if the "wife" was a man or woman, any sex with someone you are not married to would be fornication. Biblical marriage is only a man and a woman and sex outside that is fornication regardless of the genders involved.
Absolutely. However, since Jesus never alluded to homosexuality at all, the Matthew text, which, of course, has nothing to do with homosexuality, is the red herring that the Jeff's of Christianity always pull out of the Bible as if to make their case. That said, I have never seen Matthew 19:3-7 used to condemn 'in church' divorce and remarriage. Strange, isn't it?
Quote:
Originally Posted by expatCA
You just have been in the wrong church.
Evidently. I have NEVER heard Matthew 19:3-7 used for anything other than as a red herring aimed as condemnation at those for which it is not intended.
Quote:
Originally Posted by expatCA
Jesus in context was talking about Marriage period. Thus only a man and a woman.
Note Jesus also said:
KJV Matthew 19:9 And I say unto you, Whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery: and whoso marrieth her which is put away doth commit adultery.
In other words, divorce IS permissible in cases of infidelity; however, remarriage is NOT permissible at ANY time other than in the case where a spouse dies thereby freeing up the other partner. No-fault divorce (common today within both society and 'the church') remains taboo if we're to listen to the words of Jesus.
Quote:
Originally Posted by expatCA
He did not say if the "wife" was a man or woman, any sex with someone you are not married to would be fornication. Biblical marriage is only a man and a woman and sex outside that is fornication regardless of the genders involved.
True; however, 'fornication' by heterosexuals is so rampant and always has been rampant that one would never ask for a show of hands from a church congregation as to who had refrained from having sex before they were married! Fornication, if you like, is something that occurs within homosexual circles and, overwhelmingly within heterosexual circles, that no long term condemnation could ever effectively apply to such 'sinners'.
Evidently. I have NEVER heard Matthew 19:3-7 used for anything other than as a red herring aimed as condemnation at those for which it is not intended.
In other words, divorce IS permissible in cases of infidelity; however, remarriage is NOT permissible at ANY time other than in the case where a spouse dies thereby freeing up the other partner. No-fault divorce (common today within both society and 'the church') remains taboo if we're to listen to the words of Jesus.
True; however, 'fornication' by heterosexuals is so rampant and always has been rampant that one would never ask for a show of hands from a church congregation as to who had refrained from having sex before they were married! Fornication, if you like, is something that occurs within homosexual circles and, overwhelmingly within heterosexual circles, that no long term condemnation could ever effectively apply to such 'sinners'.
It is overwhelming in both circles. But Jesus did say the majority would be on the wrong path and .... he was right. If a church ignores it, run, it is not led by Jesus.
As to remarriage he said except in the case of infidelity, so the innocent one can remarry and then of course the other one can also, as that marriage is now done. The guilty one still has to deal with God and restore the relationship and that takes repentance, real repentance.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
